Report 1071
Report #1071 Skillset: Aethercraft Skill: Empath Org: Hartstone Status: Rejected Dec 2015 Furies' Decision: This is a decisive benefit for having large ships and we do not agree that it needs to be removed. A number of co-ordinated ships attacking a behemoth effectively will be able to bring it down, but it is not meant to be easy. Problem: Turret damage provides a flat amount of damage, that is dependant on neither the firing ship nor the ship being attacked. This damage is around 500 per successful hit. Empath hull repairing, on the other hand, has a large percentile element. Ships repair approximatly 1/5th their hull plus 200 points each grid repair. This leads to a situation where very large ships can fail to grid repair hull for very long periods of time without falling behind on curing hull damage. These behemoths can repair critical modules, cure ship afflictions, and still outpace the damage of multiple attacking ships with the same (or fewer) total crew. This centralizes aetherflare mechanics around megaships when they are present. Solution #1: Lower the percentile healing and increase the flat healing. I suggest ~1/10% + 800 points. Solution #2: Institute a tiered softcap on hull. Solution #3: Player Comments: ---on 12/13 @ 10:54 writes: Would it not also be workable to change turret hits to incorporate a % element? ---on 12/13 @ 10:54 writes: To clarify: I'm thinking of the possible PVE implications behind the above change ---on 12/13 @ 19:15 writes: So, my suggested healing formula pivots around a hull of about 8000 points. Ships below that will experience stronger healing, ships above weaker. Most ships used for aetherbashing are below the 8k mark, so they will experience stronger hull repairs. However, (unlike increasing turret damage,) they will not generate essence any faster. ---on 12/13 @ 19:19 writes: I haven't had a chance to sit down and think out some example math for my second solution. Again, taking ships of about 7000-8000 hull as a center point: if after ~7000 hull each new room only adds half as much hull, with further halvings every 2k hull or so we can expect practical caps (I think) of about 16-17k hull, as rooms quickly will add only one point of hull. For the sake of completeness, there should probably also be a hardcap at some point. I also previously had a third solution on this report that included an option for % damage to ships (but not aetherbeasts). It would function similarily to bombard (and require you to not be bombading), would tie up your turret balances (so fewer/no ship afflictions), but would deal exponentially more damage to a ship the larger it is and the more disabled it already is. ---on 12/13 @ 19:21 writes: I think that the first two solutions are a good first step even without bore (solution 3). The first solution does not solve the issue, it merely raises the floor of the problematic range to ships with far higher hull (twice as high- ish). The second solution then tackles the ceiling, hopefully bringing it down below the floor, closing the problem range tidily. ---on 12/14 @ 15:41 writes: Personally, I prefer Raeri's suggestion to add a % element to turret firing instead. ---on 12/15 @ 12:00 writes: Just affect turret damage on ships would not definitely not affect PVE anymore. Converting this formula to turret damage, I get 500 per turret damage on 6k hull, which decreases with less hull. Forcing 500 per turret damage to be minumum, I get approximately per turret damage = 0.0171x + 460, where x is hull. The new formula makes it so that 20k hull needs only >6 turrets to take down, where current formula requires >9.2 turrets. I am in support of the concept behind this report. ---on 12/17 @ 19:40 writes: I'd rather just tackle the problem on the empathing side of things. Changing turret formulas will have some alternative effects, it's not quite the same thing as running similar math on the empath/hull side. I don't really see any advantages to putting that change on turrets. ---on 12/19 @ 21:31 writes: I don't understand why this nerf is needed. Doesn't everyone have access to giant ships now a days? Isn't it still possible to overwhelm a giant ship with good strategy? I just don't see any reason for this report other than a general dislike of the aethercombat strategy with giant ships involved. It's really a huge nerf to grid healing for any ship with over 8k hull, especially ships at the upper bound of ship hull ---on 12/19 @ 21:33 writes: To be clear, you're balancing around 8k, when the max hull a ship can acheive is over 8 times that. ---on 12/21 @ 19:00 writes: I'm aware, the point is to lower the upper bounds of practical and actual ship hull. Having massive hull removes the 'strategy' portion of aethercombat for those massive ships, as they can easily repair ship afflictions and module damage while staying well ahead of incoming damage due to the large scalar portion of empath healing. I'm balancing around 8k hull because that is the point at which a ship can currently heal the damage of a single other ship attacking them (directly to the hull) in a deadspace with no turret misfires. My solutions maintain this as the pivot point. Larger ships will still outpace that damage with healing (on top of requiring more damage to destroy), smaller ships will still not outpace the damage (on top of requiring less damage), the difference will just be dramatically smaller. ---on 12/21 @ 19:08 writes: To be clear, no it isn't reasonably possible to overwhelm a giant ship with good strategy. They can use many grid balances to repair your ship afflictions and module damage, only needing to grid repair very infrequently. A ship with 64000 hull (8000 * 8) heals ~13000 hull health every grid repair. This means that they need to successfully grid repair once every 26 successful turret hits directly to their hull (not their shield) to maintain stable hull. After you factor in turret misses, the turret balances needed to deal ship afflictions, and turrets targeting modules, the number of turret balances required to damage - Note I said 'damage', not 'destroy', I mean literally to make their hull trend downwards - balloons even further into absurdity. ---on 12/22 @ 03:06 writes: 1) Getting a giant ship is pratical - at least 3 orgs (if not more) have a giant ship they can use, others with ships with decent amount of hull strength. 2) Using ship afflictions and good strategy, it is indeed possible to take down giant ships. It's been done before through various means.. Sure, a ship with 8k hull shouldn't be able to drop a ship with 64k hull with ease, but that only makes sense. It's possible to bring multiple ships to a flare as well, adding even in more turrets. I don't agree with this solution, it's quite a large nerf, too heavy handed, and it doesn't seem very well founded or researched. ---on 12/22 @ 06:11 writes: Indeed it is... My solutions make large ships impractical, they lower the upper bounds of practical ship hulls. You'd need to bring approximatly 9 ships with three turrets firing to outpace the healing of a single ship with 64k hull (assuming no turrets ever miss). Your points 1 and 2 are either irrelevant or are not born out by the math. ---on 12/22 @ 06:14 writes: Remember, at that much hull you need 26 turret hits to equal a single grid heal. That's ~26 people locked into turrets. Obviously, not all of the mega ships have 64k hull, but there isn't anything technically stopping anyone from getting there - as you've pointed out. ---on 12/22 @ 06:17 writes: I'm curious what research you think would be adequate, actually. ---on 12/24 @ 17:27 writes: Yes, You are right, if you do nothing but just fire at the ship, you are unlikely to bring down the big ships. This should be expected and where good strategy comes in. You are simply ignoring the fact that you can use varying tactics to slow down grid curing, and overwhelm a single ship with afflictions. I've been on both ends of taking down big ships, and being taken down in a big ship (and there was not '9 ship' and we had a good empath). It IS possible to overwhelm a giant ship. You also have the option of getting your own giant ship. We've finally gotten to the point where you've established that you really just want to limit how high a ship's hull can reach (which last I checked, does actually have a hardcap) rather than adjust to the new strategies employed. This seems to be a reaction to not wanting to adjust to the changing face of aethercombat rather than an actual balance concern. ---on 12/24 @ 17:33 writes: By the way, this isn't a simple math equation, This is a system where you can apply aeon-like effects, cause failures, target specific modules, use ruptures/shockwaves, deadspace etc. Applying straight math isn't an actual reflection of the system and doesn't lend any actual validity to your statements. It shouldn't be easy for a small ship to take down a big ship. It should take work. You can also get other big ships to fight big ships. You have a varying tactics that can be adjusted to the exact situation that's in play. ---on 12/25 @ 20:19 writes: I am not ignoring that fact, it is the central point of the problem statement: A small or medium ship loses hull when they need to spend balances on curing afflictions. The 8k hull ship who can balance out turret damage with grid healing will die in short order because there is a lot more that they need to be spending those balances on. It's an issue where you get to the point where you can neglect healing hull for tremendous amounts of time (spending those balances to cure ship afflictions and module damage) and still maintain stable hull because that one hull heal repairs so much more than the hull repairs of the 8k hull ship. All of those strategies quickly begin to fade away when you have dozens of balances to deal with them before you have to worry about your hull trending downwards at all - especially when you factor in that turrets doing those afflictions are not doing hull damage (or are doing less hull damage). That I "really just want to limit how high a ship's hull can reach" was no secret: that's solution 2. As I said in my comments, the double whammy of reducing the percentile portion of hull healing and reducing the amount of hull ships have (And can possibly have) all around will help avoid ships that can ignore both damage and ship afflictions by virtue of overwhelming hull repairs. ---on 12/25 @ 20:25 writes: Again, to reiterate: In the case of a ship with 64k hull, the empath only needs to repair the hull once every ~25 successful turret hits to the hull, that aren't reduced by the shield or target any modules. If they do so, they incur zero net hull damage over that period. That's ~24 balances in which they can cure away ship afflictions and module damage with no opportunity cost. This effectivly negates the impact of those afflictions, as their point is to force healing away from the hull. The massive ship can basically ignore the hull damage for huge stretches of time, removing the biggest element of strategy from aethercombat. ---on 12/26 @ 05:27 writes: Good strategy can take down a giant aethership, no matter how many 'balances' they have to cure the hull. Everyone has access to the same giant aetherships if they choose to. There isn't any actual balance concerns stated, just a dislike of the evolving state of aethercombat, which is asking for unnecessary nerfs to satisfy personal dislikes of the system. If anything, Raeri's and Lerads suggestions for turret damage make far more sense than reducing empath healing capabilities. I don't support any of these solutions. ---on 12/26 @ 16:52 writes: Present this strategy. ---on 12/26 @ 17:41 writes: It isn't one simple strategy to win. Strategies will vary depending on the situation. It's a combination of using the skills at your disposal to overwhelm the empath making it difficult to cure, leading to failures, delays etc. A single 8k hull ship should have a difficult time taking down a 64k ship, but if they use the advantages that they have (such as speed) to lay down deadspace, ruptures, shockwaves, in addition to using module afflictions and targetting modules to overwhelm the ship. If you're forcing them to use power to cure, they aren't using power to hit you. Will it take awhile? Is it foolproof? Absolutely not, nothing where you have a % chance of failure is foolproof. Can it be done and has it been done? Yes, absolutely. ---on 12/28 @ 16:02 writes: The problem I'm highlighting is that it at the upper levels of hull, you can't just 'overwhelm the empath', because the buffer on hp is so dramatically huge. Even with several ships using full power moves, the larger ship can (say) cleanse off a shockwave (1 balance), cure module afflictions on all important modules (4-5 balances), and spend many balances to counteract module damage (another 15 or so balances) without losing any hull health once they spend a single balance to heal hull - even in deadspace, where my numbers were gathered. They don't need to use power for this, because the hull healing is so strong that they can easily afford to wait enormous stretches of time. Nothing you have presented has approached this essential issue: Having a big ship not only makes it take longer to kill you, it dramatically changes the balance economy and opportunity costs of curing your ship. The large ship has PLENTY of leisure time to cure off ship afflictions and module damage. For the large ship, there IS one simple strategy to win. ---on 12/28 @ 17:28 writes: I disagree, it's been shown to be possible to overwhelm large ships. It doesn't matter if a large ship has more leisure time because you can overwhelm them and you are giving up other advantages to gain that 'leisure time'. You also keep ignoring the fact that you can get the same size ship. You have yet to present any actual balance concerns other than 'I don't like fighting ships with huge hulls' which isn't an actual balance concern and just a refusal to adapt to the changing landscape of aethercombat. You have options to compete against large ships, you can take down large ships, you can have large ships yourself. It's not a balance concern if you refuse to adapt to the situation. It's unfair to nerf something because you don't want to change your style. This is an un-needed change. No support. ---on 12/29 @ 19:56 writes: Final rundown of the repeated refutal of your points: The singular advantage you give up with a massive hull is much slower steering, which isn't a hindrance in the modern age of aetherflares. Between whistles, bubblixes, flashpoints, beacons, and anchor modules there is no reason to move a ship once it is in position, and it's incredibly easy to get any ship into position. Large ships functionally give up nothing in exchange for the overwhelming benefits described in this report. Balance concerns have been noted and demonstrated exhaustivly with hard numbers, you've just ignored them. You haven't actually presented any of these mythical options in detail, and your vague defense of the current mechanics has been repeatedly addressed, including in the problem statement. All ship healing is on the same balance and the strength of a ship's offense is fixed. Therefore, having dramatically more efficient balances eventually eliminates the effect of module damage and afflictions, that effect being to force healing away from the hull long enough to degrade the hull to zero (or low enough to ram). Present a flow of events by which a crew of equivalent size may take down a crewed megaship in a reasonable timeframe. Heck, a crew double the size of a fully crewed megaship (up to 12 people). Even a crew triple the size! If the upper limit is ~64k hull, use my (correct) numbers - as you point out, there isn't anything stopping players from getting that high of hull. Keep in mind that it will take 128 direct hits to hull to take down the megaship, and that each megaship hull heal eliminates the equivalent of 26 direct hits of damage. Everyone being able to use a broken mechanic does not fix it. When the Aerochem bombs were causing issues, that flaw was entirely useable by all of the other chems. It was unexpected behavior and needed to be remedied regardless of how equitably it could be applied. Ship mechanics came out of an age of Lusternia where I don't think it could reasonably have been predicted that Type MORE to continue reading. (92% shown)